Scattered Skeletons in our Closet

HOAXES

INTRODUCTION

A war has been quietly raging for 150 years in the hallowed halls of academia that few people are aware of. It is a war between conflicting ideologies for ownership of our extreme past, for accurate information on human origins. The two adversaries are unevenly matched: on one side there is Darwinian evolution with its paradigms which are virtually unchallenged in textbooks and universities around the world. It dovetails neatly with other disciplines like geology, biology, anthropology and genetics and is by far the dominant paradigm about human origins. On the other side is a dedicated group known as creationists who run their own colleges and teach that the Biblical account of creation is absolute and unquestionable. As fundamentalist Christians, they cannot accept Darwinian evolution and do everything to prove that humans did not evolve from apes or that geological eras of millions of years did not exist.

For someone like me, who neither accepts creationism nor aspects of Darwinism such as macroevolution, it is extremely difficult to come across unbiased information. To make matters even more confusing, a more recent theory called Intervention Theory tries to prove that humans were genetically engineered by extraterrestrials. Anomalous skeletal finds, such as those discussed in this book, are often seized by these adherents as evidence of these ancient visitations. Or they are claimed by creationists who are looking for evidence of a global flood. Another fairly recent theory, Hindu creationism, willingly accepts an extreme antiquity for humans because it is supported in the Vedic scriptures, but dispenses with the evolutionary progression of species.

Personally, I am not totally comfortable with any existing paradigm. Creationism and its offspring Intelligent Design exist to defend the Genesis account of creation despite the fact that book was basically a compilation of earlier Mesopotamian myths and legends. However, I don’t automatically dismiss all of the theories or findings of trained creationist anthropologists, especially when they reveal shortcomings in Darwinism.

Intervention Theory cannot be proved or disproved. While it is possible that extraterrestrials did visit the earth, or interbreed with humans, there is no conclusive fossil evidence to support this theory. However, it is possible that the ‘Starchild’ skull might eventually shed some light on this theory when its nuclear DNA is properly sequenced.

The current position of human evolution is far more complicated and convoluted than imagined by early anthropologists, as new finds in Africa, Asia and Europe, as well as mitochondrial DNA testing of fossilized remains, reveals many puzzling and sometimes contradictory insights.

Despite these controversies, Darwinian evolution remains all pervasive in schools and universities. When I was at school in the 1970s a poster of human evolution graced the walls of most classrooms with diagrams showing a gradual progression from ape to humans, via various hairy, hunchbacked ape men. The progression went in a neat linear progression like this- ape- Australopithecus-Homo habilis- Homo erectus, Neanderthals and finally the glorious Cro Magnon race. By the time I studied Physical Anthropology at the University of Sydney, the story presented was similar, but there were furiously contested theories about various hominids and dates and many strange offshoots in this family tree were being discovered.

Discoveries over the past few decades have created many conundrums for physical anthropologists as various species are assigned and reassigned, well established fossils are criticized and DNA tests are sometimes shown to be inaccurate. Some well loved species such as australopithecus have virtually been dumped from the family tree, while many anthropologists and palaeontologists still argue about what is human and what is simian in the archaeological record, or at what point in time humanity supposedly left Africa to colonise the world.

The purpose of this book is to highlight some of the anomalous findings in the evolutionary paradigm as applied to human physical development. Temporally anomalous discoveries which are often relegated to the basement of museums will be dusted off and given attention. Flaws in the evolutionary sequence will be highlighted. Out of place remains recovered from areas in which they are not supposed to be will also be discussed. This also opens a Pandora’s box of information on what is being labelled as suppressed archaeology by such popular writers as Michael Cremo and Lloyd Pye.

Furthermore, chapters will be devoted to legends and actual discoveries of both diminutive humans, like the hobbits of Flores, and giants which were allegedly uncovered in large numbers in the 19th century.

The final chapter concentrates upon some very strange and highly anomalous human skulls which have been recovered over the years. This includes Pye’s ‘Starchild’, the cone heads of ancient Mesoamerica and other malformed skulls.

Rather than giving wholesale support to any particular theory on human origins, my aim is to simply look at the big picture which reveals, through fossils, the wonderful journey of the human race.

PART 1

HUMAN ORIGIN THEORIES

CLASSIFICATION ISSUES

DATING TECHNIQUES

HUMAN ORIGIN THEORIES

MECHANISMS OF DARWINIAN EVOLUTION

WHAT CREATIONISTS BELIEVE ABOUT

HUMAN ORIGINS

EVOLUTION FAKES AND MISTAKES

CREATIONIST HOAXES AND MISTAKES

CLASSIFICATION ISSUES

Physical anthropology is the branch of anthropology that studies the evolutionary development of human physical characteristics and the differences in appearance among the peoples of the world. As a science it relies heavily upon classification of species, subspecies and various other physical characteristics. The whole science is inextricably linked to evolutionary theory, and thus any discoveries which don’t conform to evolutionary paradigms can be ignored, reclassified, or at worst, totally disregarded. As can be demonstrated in this chapter, the language of this discipline is entirely related to evolutionary theory which influences the whole study of anthropology to the point that any other paradigm exploring human origins is rendered baseless.

TAXONOMY is the practice and science of classification. Taxonomic hierarchies are kinds of things that are arranged in a hierarchical structure. Initially taxonomy referred to the classification of living organisms but now it is applied in a more general sense. Linnaean taxonomy is the formal system used in biology in this order: Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Cohort, Order, Superfamily, Family, Genus and Species. For instance, modern human beings are classified as thus:

Domain –Eukarya, Kingdom- Animalia, Phylum- Chordata, Class- Mammalia.

Cohort- Placentalia, Order-Primates, Superfamily- Hominoidea

Family- Hominidae, Genus- Homo, Species- Homo sapiens

PHYLOGENETICS is the study of evolutionary relatedness among various groups or organisms through molecular sequencing data.

CLADISTICS is the hierarchical classification of species based on evolutionary ancestry. Cladisties is different from other taxonomic systems because it focuses on evolution and places heavy emphasis on objective, quantitative analysis. Cladistics diagrams are called cladograms that represent the evolutionary tree of life. Cladistics originated in the work of German entomologist Willi Hennig and the term is often used synonymously with phylogenetics.

HOMINID OR HOMININ? These words have often been used synonymously but there are subtle distinctions based upon Linnaean taxonomy. In the old system, ‘hominid’ refers solely to the bipedal ape lineage. In the new classification system ‘hominid’ is a broader system of all the great apes, including fossils like Kenyanthropus.

‘Hominin’ technically is a subfamily of the Hominidae family. The bipedal apes like chimpanzees, the extinct fossils and living people all are part of the tribe Hominini (hominin). All hominins are hominids, but not all hominids are hominins, says palaeoanthropologist Lee Berger.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1204_hominin_id_2.html

According to Wikipedia:

  A hominoid or ape is a member of the superfamily Hominoidea: extant members are the lesser apes (gibbons) and great apes.

  A hominid is a member of the family Hominidae: all of the great apes.

  A hominine is a member of the subfamily Homininae: gorillas, chimpanzees, humans (excludes orangutans).

  A hominin is a member of the tribe Hominini. chimpanzees and humans.

  A hominan is a member of the sub-tribe Hominina: modern humans and their extinct relatives.

THE HOMINOID LINEAGE includes not only current and extinct apes, but also current and extinct humans in the superfamily of Hominoidea. These hominoids include the genera of homo (humans), Pan (Chimpanzees), Gorilla, Pongo (orangutans) and four genera of gibbons.

It is believed by evolutionists that the initial split between humans and apes was about 15-30 million years ago as various transitory fossils within that time period in Africa and Eurasia have been unearthed. A brief list of these fossilized hominoids or primates includes:

EXTINCT AFRICAN APES

Aegyptopithecus is called the Dawn Ape which lived from about 35-33 million years ago in North Africa. This ape is considered to be important because it predates the divergence between hominoids and Old World monkeys and has the reduced teeth and bony eye sockets of simians but no other features which place it in either the monkey or ape group.

Dendroipithecus is known as the ‘wood ape’ from East Africa and was a fruit eating primate about 22 million years ago. It was similar to Aegyptopithecus but had several features closer to the hominoid lineage such as a rounder, flatter face and more ape-like bones.

Proconsul africanus lived between 14-23 million years ago in the Miocene in Eastern Africa. It had a mixture of Old World monkey and ape characteristics, so is often not placed in the hominoidea superfamily. Proconsul africanus was small, weighing about 25 pounds with a brain volume of around 165 millilitres. It has long arm bones which indicate brachiation (arm swinging), although it seems to have been a generalized ape without any special adaptations. Proconsul nyanzae was chimpanzee sized and Proconsul major was possibly as big as a gorilla.

Morotopithecus was found in Lake Victoria, Africa and was about 20 million years old. It supposedly shows the earliest traces of modern hominoid skeletal features.

EXTINCT EUROPEAN APES

Dryopithecus was originally discovered in France in 1856 and others have been discovered in Austria, Germany and Spain. It was an ape which lived from 12 to 9 million years ago but developed monkey like features of locomotion such as using the flat of its hands rather than knuckle walking which was a characteristic of apes. This ape was larger than most arboreal monkeys and may have regularly come down to the ground. Dryopithecus was probably a fruitarian but had strong jaws which enabled it to cope with tougher food such as nuts.

Oreopithecus has been discovered in Italy and lived from 9-7 million years ago. Its skull and teeth are monkey-like but the rest of its skeleton has ape features including no tail. Its long brachiated arms have hands adapted to hanging from branches. Its classification remains controversial in the hominoid evolutionary tree, as some believe it is an Old World monkey, while others think it was an ape.

EXTINCT ASIAN APES

Sivapithecus lived in Pakistan and India from 12.5 to 8.5 million years ago. It had the face, palate and size of an orangutan. Ramapithecus was originally found in Nepal in 1932 and initially considered to be an ancestor of humans. With its fairly flat face, parabolic lower jaw and small canine teeth, it was favored as a human ancestor until the mid 1960s. In the 1970s molecular studies indicated a more recent split between humans and apes of 10-7 million years ago and Ramapithecus was demoted as a human ancestor. Similar fossils were uncovered in Turkey, Pakistan and even Fort Ternan, Kenya. Now many researchers believe it is the female form of Sivapitheus and is not a direct ancestor.

Gigantopithecus is an extinct genus of ape which existed from about one million to 300,000 years ago in China, India and Vietnam. Gigantopithecus blacki were the largest apes that ever lived standing almost (3 m) 10 feet tall and weighing about 1,200 pounds (540 kg). At first only the teeth of the huge ape had been found in an apothecary shop by anthropologist Ralph von Koenigswald in China, but in recent decades teeth and mandibles have been discovered in China, India and Vietnam. The large, thickly enameled molar teeth and small incisors indicate this giant was a vegetarian and probably resembled a giant orangutan.

Creationist websites often erroneously claim Gigantopithecus is a human of gigantic proportions, a relative or Meganthropus, but all the evidence indicates it was an ape and not a hominin. Others believe it could still exist in isolated areas as yetis, almas and bigfoot, which is not an impossible scenario considering its fairly recent extinction.

DATING TECHNIQUES

Dating techniques are crucial to the science of physical anthropology as they are used to demonstrate the infallibility of evolutionary theory. Presently there are both absolute and relative dating techniques which have been developed. There are currently more than a dozen techniques for dating the age of rocks and fossils, each with its strengths and shortcomings. The most common are:

STRATIGRAPHY is the branch of geology concerned with the identification, dating and naming of stratified rocks (beds or layers) which may contain fossils. Generally younger rocks and fossils are found near the surface on top of older layers. However, earthquakes, fault lines and folding can tilt, bend or even overturn strata so that dating becomes very difficult. Paleontologists have charted the fossils typical of each layer, allowing them to be able to date most fossils according to other fossils found with them or the type of rock in which they are embedded.

Stratigraphy often relies upon evolutionary models so that fossils found in strata are able to be dated according to where they should lie in the evolutionary sequence, not necessarily their real age. This concept is of vital importance when studying human origins as many hominin fossils have been discovered in strata which may be older or younger than those containing similar fossils, but are dated according to a theoretical construct and not their true age.

Another problem with stratigraphic dating is that of intrusive burials. Some modern humans have been buried in deeper layers, making their age seem much greater. This excuse is always exploited by evolutionists to account for modern human skeletons which have been recovered from great depths, although it is usually possible for a geologist to study the surrounding earth of a burial to check for its age and determine if it is an intrusive burial.

RADIOMETRIC DATING is a form of absolute dating. As rocks form chemical substances which naturally give off radioactivity are encapsulated within them. These turn from one form (or isotope) of an element into another or even into a different element. This is radioactive decay; the original substance is the ‘parent’ and the new one is the ‘daughter.’ The parent decay is regular and can be measured by half-life: the time taken for half the number of parent atoms to decay into daughters. Working back from the relative amounts of parent and daughter, it is possible to calculate when the rock was formed.

Absolute dating by radioactive decay uses a series of decay sequences, such as potassium-argon (K-Ar), rubidium-strontium, uranium-thorium-lead and ‘carbon dating’. Carbon dating relies on measuring the residual levels of radioactive carbon-14 in the specimen. C14 is most useful for organic matter up to 70,000 years old.

C14 has had its problems and is not entirely reliable. Generally the rate of creation of C14 has been constant, but it can be affected by eruptions of volcanoes or other events which give off large amounts of CO2 and reduce local concentrations of C14, thus giving inaccurate dates.

Initial, or ‘raw’ dates need to be calibrated to compensate for the changes in atmospheric C14 and variations in cosmic rays. Comparisons with other dating methods, such as tree growth rings (dendrochronology,) and deep ocean sediment cores, also show the need for recalibration of raw dates.

However, calibration curves can vary significantly from a straight line, so comparison of uncalibrated radiocarbon dates can give misleading results. There are also significant plateaux in the curve such as the one from 11,000 to 10,000 radiocarbon years B.P. which was probably associated with changing ocean currents during the Younger Dryas period.

Once calibrated a radiocarbon date should be expressed in terms of cal B.C, cal A.D. or cal B.P.

Apart from the shortcomings of calibrated vs. uncalibrated C14 dating, it is also only available to date specimens with organic material and cannot be used to date objects beyond 70,000 years.

Potassium-argon or K-Ar dating measures the radioactive decay of potassium which is found in many rocks and minerals. It is based on the fact that some of the radioactive isotope of Potassium, Potassium-40 (K-40) decays to the gas Argon as Argon-40 (AR-40). By comparing the proportion of K-40 to Ar-40 in a sample of volcanic rock, and knowing the slow decay rate of K-40, that rock’s date can be ascertained. This dating is the most useful for very ancient geographic and archaeological specimens such as the hominins of Olduvai Gorge and Hadar in Ethiopia. The limitations of K-Ar dating are:

  It works well on any igneous or volcanic rock which hasn’t gone through a heating or recrystallization process after its initial formation. Only trained geologists should collect samples in the field.

  Because materials dated using this method are not the direct result of human activity (unlike C14), it is critical that the association between the igneous/volcanic bed being dated and the strata containing human evidence is very carefully established.

  K-Ar dating is accurate from 4.33 billion years to about 100,000 B.P. After that it is inaccurate.

PALEOMAGNETISM is the study of the history of the Earth’s magnetic field which has changed many times. As igneous rocks form from molten lava, particles of magnetite line up according to the Earth’s magnetic field at the time. Scientists study the direction and degree of particle alignment, allowing them to produce a magnetic chronology. Fossils can be dated from igneous rocks above or below them although the method is only useful for igneous rock containing magnetite.

FLUORINE DATING Bones and teeth fossils absorb natural fluorine from the ground water around them. Rates of fluorine absorption vary greatly but fossils from different levels of the same site, or from comparable sites can be dated relative to each other by analyzing their fluorine content. The more fluorine they hold, the older they are.

ELECTRON-SPIN RESONANCE (ESR) This method measures the resonance or vibration of the electrons of a substance which can reveal the time the substance became stabilized. It measures the resonance under the effect of a powerful magnetic field by microwaves beamed through the specimen.

This technique is used mainly to date minerals but can be useful for dating sedimentary quartz, fossilized teeth, flint and calcium carbonate.

DENDROCHRONOLOGY is the method of dating based upon tree-ring patterns. Generally there is one tree ring per year although this can vary on rare occasions. A benefit of dendro-chronology is that it is based on once-living material and can be accurately dated to a specific year to be used as a calibration and check of radiocarbon dating. The bristlecone pine is one of the oldest living things on Earth and can be used to provide tree ring patterns going back thousands of years, even up to 10,000 years. Dendrochronology can have its limitations, especially when the wood has been damaged by ants. While useful for tree dating, it is less reliable for dating wooden structures because it only dates the wood itself which may be much older than the structure, or may be a more recent replacement beam in an older structure.

HUMAN ORIGIN THEORIES

Prior to Darwin and his Theory of Evolution, most people assumed that God had created human beings in His own likeness and placed them in the Garden of Eden. This theory has not died out and has enjoyed resurgence in the movements known as Creationism and Intelligent Design. Even more recently, the Vedic story of creation has been used by a couple of scholars to challenge Darwinian evolution.

This chapter gives a brief overview of the main theories which explore the mystery of human origins.

DARWINIAN EVOLUTION

The currently favored human origins paradigm dictates that all animals, plants and humans have evolved from earlier forms and share a common ancestry. Mechanisms of